Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1887-04-01
CURRENT AFFAIRS.
YHE EDuuNDS- TUCKER Bfhh.

IIfE EI).H t-NI''N- I n Ish mum
From the Burlington Free Press.
Some uncertainty respecting the provis-
ions Of the now Edmunds-T Tucker Mormon
bill, as well rs the disquietude regarding its
effectiveness, seems 10 prevail in the public
mind There are those who assert that it
is step backward, and cannot prove as EFF
fectivc as the law formerly in operation.
Such fears, however, seem to he ground
less. The Senate bill, as first prepared,
was carefully drawn in considerable part
10y Senator Edmunds 1t passed the Sen
ate and was made still more comprehensive
by the House Finally having been modi-
fled by a conference committee, it was
passed by large majorities in both houses.
Those who are of opinion that this bill is
less severe than its predecessor will do well
to consult its provisions against polygamy (;
the publicity of marriages which it re
qures its dissolution of the two great in
corporations, the Emigration Fund compa
ny and the Mormon church, and the sec
lions prescribing registration of voters, and
IA test oath rs conditions 10 the right of suf-
frage. 1t is not an ambiguous or loose
statute
There is perhaps one weak point in it,
which, however, may not prove to he Il
weak point after all This is the striking
from the Edmunds bill of the provision that
the governor of the territory should ap-
point the territorial officers In place of
/ this the officers will again he elective 80
that. if the MuInuns can succeed in evad
/ ing or overriding the test oath they will
again acquire control. This provision Of
the new bill caused the Murmons to cele-
brnte its passage with various dcmonstra
tions Of delight, and indications are said to
be- multiplying that they will take the oath
/ aud vote IN large numbers. But 1t remains
/ tn Ice seen how many of them will he allow
/ eel tu qualify We question whether they
can override the test oath rs they propose.
/ In the hands of the right sort of commi,
/ siuners. the Edmunds- Tucker law need not
/ put the government of the territory back
| into the hands Of the Mormuns How il
will work in practice remains to be seen.
/ 4 man who takes the test oath referred
/ to swears that he will not commit the crime
of poyeamy or adultery, and that he will
not, even indirectly, aid or advise any 9th
er person Ia do So
The New York Times, taking II view con
tlary tu the one summarized in this clip
ping from the Free Press, holds that Nor
mons wh he stand hy and support the church.
including its polyganous doctrine, hut who
do not themselves practice polygamy. can
not he successfully prosecuted for taking
the test oath Fifteen thousand practical
| polygamists," the Times says were dis
rlHnchiscd hy the Edmunds act. We do
not understand that they have voted sine,
that act was enforced II any one Of them
shall attempt b. vote hy means of thi, oath
hr will simply invite prosecution for hi-
chief offence, it he bc still living in the
| polygamous relation, and also for having
sworn falsely. But IL is not clear how
monogami-t, in practice who believe that
! pulyEmuy is not crime and Who support q
church that sanctions polvguluy and VIII,
still take this OATH are To- Ice punished,
j'ndcr what circumstances viii it appeal
that they have periured themselves oi
broken their promises How can it hr
shown that they have aided or counselrd
any other person to commit polygamy II
does not seem probable that those who huy,
taken the oath, and the many others VIII,
will follow their example really intend t.
! support the laws and to discountenance any
violation Of them. But if they intend t,
support the church and it, doctrines how ar,
they 10 he deprived of the voting privileg,
gained 10y taking the oath, unless they shal
openly defy the laws 10y becoming polyEa
rnists in practice =
The question is an important one in it.
effect on the solution of the Mormon prob
lem and the results Of the operation Of tn,
ur,,. Ia,y viii I've awaited ,Nith universal la